57 replies to this topic

[questionmark]

Rafterman, on 08 February 2013 - 03:41 PM, said:

Well as much as the media and the antis would want you to think otherwise, Sandy Hook was an anomaly.  And the dirty little secret that many will not even mention for obvious reasons is that the crime problem in the US is primarily an inner city black and Hispanic phenomenon.  There is a socio-economic component that touches all races, but the bulk is made up of black-on-black crime.  Very few will say this, but one only has to look at the numbers to see it.

Now I don't have numbers to back this up, but I've heard for years from various sources that if you remove the black-on-black and gang crime from US statistics, our crime rates per capita are on par with that of European countries.

And again, I'll harp on my favorite point - yes, a few thousand guns are used to kill people annually in the US.  But there are also 300 MILLION guns in private hands in the United States.  Do the math.  299.998 million guns do nothing except put food on the table, destroy little clay discs, punch holes in paper, and bring joy to their owners.

That still does not mean that we just sit idle around and do nothing to prevent the crime.

[Michelle]

questionmark, on 08 February 2013 - 03:53 PM, said:

That still does not mean that we just sit idle around and do nothing to prevent the crime.

We need to do something productive, like putting criminals behind bars, instead of feel good band aid solutions that will do nothing.

[aztek]

actually it is a good idea to do nothing, if you don't know what to do, cuz you most likely will turn things even worst.

[Sweetpumper]

aztek, on 08 February 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

actually it is a good idea to do nothing, if you don't know what to do, cuz you most likely will turn things even worst.

"Get the hell out of the way."

[rashore]

Wow.. I thought it was interesting that half or more of the gunfire deaths were suicides. I realize people do that, but I didn't realize how much it was, especially in relation to total gun deaths.

[aztek]

is that all shootings, including shooting by cops?

[Taun]

SInce 1899 there have been 3,546,415 deaths in America due to automobiles (through 2011)...

Obviously automobiles are three times as deadly as guns, and three times as deadly as all the wars that we have fought... Lets ban automobiles...

Look at it this way...

Accidental deaths

"Number of physicians in the US: 700,000.
Accidental deaths caused by physicians per year: 120,000. Accidental
deaths per physician.... 0.171
(U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services)

Number of gun owners in the US: 80,000,000.
Number of accidental gun deaths per year: 1,500 (all age groups)
Accidental deaths per gun owner: 0.0000188

Therefore, statistically,
Doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners."

http://www.famguardi...entalDeaths.htm

Lets ban doctors too while we're at it...

Edited by Taun, 08 February 2013 - 05:37 PM.

[questionmark]

Taun, on 08 February 2013 - 05:35 PM, said:

SInce 1899 there have been 3,546,415 deaths in America due to automobiles (through 2011)...

Obviously automobiles are three times as deadly as guns, and three times as deadly as all the wars that we have fought... Lets ban automobiles...

Look at it this way...

Accidental deaths

"Number of physicians in the US: 700,000.
Accidental deaths caused by physicians per year: 120,000. Accidental
deaths per physician.... 0.171
(U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services)

Number of gun owners in the US: 80,000,000.
Number of accidental gun deaths per year: 1,500 (all age groups)
Accidental deaths per gun owner: 0.0000188

Therefore, statistically,
Doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners."

http://www.famguardi...entalDeaths.htm

Lets ban doctors too while we're at it...

Nice, but that is not how statistics are supposed to work (unless we want to sell people as idiots down the river). You have to also consider that doctors work at least 8 hours a day, cars are operated several hours a day and guns on average 1-2 hours per month (if at all).

[AsteroidX]

Quote

guns on average 1-2 hours per month (if at all).

Youd be suprised at the time some gun owners spend and the cost they incur to keep their aim sharp and gunskills above par.

[questionmark]

AsteroidX, on 08 February 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

Youd be suprised at the time some gun owners spend and the cost they incur to keep their aim sharp and gunskills above par.

I can tell you this much, if it is more than 5% of those 80 million I would be very surprised. Because if all those people practiced we would have many less gun accidents.

Edited by questionmark, 08 February 2013 - 05:48 PM.

[AsteroidX]

Quote

I can tell you this much, if it is more than 5% of those 80 million I would be very surprised. Because if all those people practiced we would have many less gun accidents.

Im not saying its a huge percentage of gun owners but those that have ccw's are more likely to spend trime on the range weekly if not monthly then those that do not. Unless there LEO's. Then they only do there mandatory live fire testing and real live target shooting for sport. Again with the exception being the rule for range time.

[freetoroam]

Michelle, on 08 February 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

It sounds like they may be focusing on the real problem...black on black gun crime. School shootings are few and far between, but many black teens are killed every day with barely a mention in the news.

I know, what really got me though is that the black on black crime has been going on for years, they know this. These gangs who have gained their guns illegally to shoot each other, have made a  situation for debate for the responsible gun owners.
The reason i mentioned this programme is its going to be the same old story....white children have been killed, innocent people are getting killed each day, black and white, and yet the focus is going to be on the "poor black kids" who have to join a gang to survive on the street. there is a mother on the advert saying how good her son was...FCOL, how many years and how much more money do these people need to get them out of this "culture"?
Obviously something has to be done, but they have known this for years, so i do not see why the deaths of innocent children in Sandy Hook has to be used to address the black on black crime and the black gangs.?

[questionmark]

freetoroam, on 08 February 2013 - 07:25 PM, said:

I know, what really got me though is that the black on black crime has been going on for years, they know this. These gangs who have gained their guns illegally to shoot each other, have made a  situation for debate for the responsible gun owners.

Not always illegally, as they can buy their guns from private citizens legally, gang member or not. If they were background checked my bet is that they would not get a gun... legally.

[jugoso]

When I read the article, I don´t see the word "ban" anywhere. The article was an investigation into the claim made by Mark Sheilds on Dec 21 that the total number of domestic gun-related deaths is greater than the total number of soldiers killed in the war. The study clearly states where they got their statistics in addition to there definitions

Quote

Where possible, we’ve used the broadest definition of "death" -- that is, all war-related deaths, not just those that occurred in combat.

Quote

We should note that these figures refer to all gun-fire related deaths -- not just homicides, but also suicides and accidental deaths. In 2011, about one-quarter of firearm-related deaths were homicides, according to FBIand CDC data. Using total firearm-related deaths makes the case against guns more dramatic than just using homicides alone.

So what this study did was investigate whether this claim was true or not and also added information about the parameters used so people could have a little better understanding as to how the numbers were determined.

I didn´t see the word "ban" used once in the OP artice and not exactly sure why everyone is getting their panties in a bunch over an investigation  to determine if the claim made was true.

[Yamato]

freetoroam, on 08 February 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

When i say you have reached a point, it is not something which happened over night!
The question has been asked as to  why people have guns and the answers have been because they need them to protect themselves...yes there are also the hunters too, but that is a separate issue.
My main point was if it were in America like it is here in the UK where we do not have guns and neither do our bobbies, how would that affect those stats?

We reached the point in 1775.  Maybe it's easy to forget that from a UK perspective.   Violent crime is at a 20 year low in this country; by some counts it's at a 40 year low.   If you're suggesting that we need to protect ourselves from tyranny more than ever before, that might be a more accurate statement but your meaning is still too unclear.

Your police have guns, as is made clear by famous cases like Jean Charles de Menezes.  It's the situations where their lives could have been saved if they were carrying one that's remained controversial about your law.  I think the focus of the debate should shift to take a critical look at reforming your laws for a change.